Recently, Microsoft released Internet Explorer 8, which boasted much better standards compliance than previous iterations of the browser. While it passed the Acid2 test, IE8 failed miserably in the Acid3 test, and many people criticised Microsoft for it. Microsoft Australia's Nick Hodge has stated that Microsoft purposefully decided not to support Acid3, because the test tests against draft standards.

No worries, I've seen your mis-information all over this thread and was waiting for your response.

Browsers are free, no one cares about lock-in...if you don't like what a browser does (as an end user), then move on. If you don't like what it does (as a developer) then don't develop for it, or figure out ways around whatever isn't working for you.

Sometimes I wonder if the only people who jump up and down screaming "standards standards standards" are people who've never actually developed real world web apps, simply because they have nothing better to do.

Have you ever wondered why these standards are still just in 'recommended' or 'draft' standard? Because no one out in the real world of web development cares about them...at least not the ones mentioned over and over in this thread.

JIT javascript compilers deliver very impressive performance and open up entirely new capabilities.

Perhaps, as a web developer, it is time that you updated your skills to encompass these new emerging standards-based features, rather than relying on the already-on-its-way-out non-standrad quirks of IE and proprietary plugins for it.

Have you ever wondered why these standards are still just in 'recommended' or 'draft' standard? Because no one out in the real world of web development cares about them...at least not the ones mentioned over and over in this thread.

The ones mentioned like PNG, SVG 1.2 (or 1.1/1.0)?

I haven't met anyone "in the real world" who isn't about standards for a while, about 3 years. Maybe I'm not in the same environment as you.

"In the real world" standards save time, and because time is money it saves money too. It means with the exception of IE, I can trust that my site will work (with about 99% certainty) on the next iteration of their browser engine. And here's a kicker, I charge extra on a monthly fee for testing when new browser versions come out. It's about keeping the site updated.

"In the real world" it's really important that browsers implement these standards correctly and keep up to date with new ones to push the web forward, not their own agenda.

One thing I don't see mentioned as a reason for implementing drafts of standards with specific tags is so developers can start testing them before using them on live sites. As more developers test the more likely a glitch will happen. The more likely a glitch is found before real world implementation of the spec, the less likely it will hinder the web.

Some standards should of course be adhered to, and the ones you mentioned are decent examples. But everything in Acid3? Sometimes I feel that many developers do frilly stuff like that just because they can, not because they should.